Slashdot Mirror

Hitting submit instead of preview FTW. Blaming Australia for overfishing is another red herring because 1) they're working on reducing quotas, as opposed to Japan 2) most of the overfishing has been done by....Japan and 3) most of the international trade of bluefin goes to....Japan.

The current Australian government has been making increasingly bizarre decisions, many of which will clearly will be to the detriment of Australian citizens. It's very likely this decision to ban a specific vendor, along with many other recent government mandates are at the behest of their puppet masters.

“Four Corners” itself noted that the key Labor coup plotters, as revealed in WikiLeaks cables, had long been secretly informing Washington about the internal workings of the Labor government. The same cables make clear that the Obama administration was disenchanted with Rudd over a range of issues, especially his attempts to moderate rising tensions between the US and China. Gillard, on the other hand, was viewed in positive terms as someone who could be counted on to toe Washington’s line.

http://indymedia.org.au/2012/02/22/the-role-of-the-us-in-the-leadership-crisis-in-the-alp
http://pirateparty.org.au/2012/03/22/pirate-party-disgusted-by-rampant-government-secrecy/

Let's see how the corrupt US courts deal with this problem.

The US Government would rather topple New Zealand's Prime Minister than correct their own problems.

“Four Corners” itself noted that the key Labor coup plotters, as revealed in WikiLeaks cables, had long been secretly informing Washington about the internal workings of the Labor government. The same cables make clear that the Obama administration was disenchanted with Rudd over a range of issues, especially his attempts to moderate rising tensions between the US and China. Gillard, on the other hand, was viewed in positive terms as someone who could be counted on to toe Washington’s line.

http://indymedia.org.au/2012/02/22/the-role-of-the-us-in-the-leadership-crisis-in-the-alp

Of course not! Why would anyone turn down a subsidy offered? That doesn't change the fact, however, that A Nuclear Power plant and produce energy cheaper than coal

Citation needed. On the other hand, I'll provide some:

"Nick d'Arbeloff, president of the New England Clean Energy Council, views nuclear plants as costly. "Nuclear power plants are massively expensive and they are massively subsidized."
"By far the cheapest, cleanest, and quickest strategy to meet America's growing demand for electricity is energy efficiency and demand-side management."
"For Cheap Clean Energy, Go Geothermal, Study Says".
"Coal is America's most abundant and cheapest fossil fuel but, as Scott Pelley reports, burning it happens to be the biggest contributor to global warming."

Wiki has a table of the cost of various energy sources at Levelised energy cost. Of more than 10 sources listed of cost per megawatt coal is cheapest while 4 others are potentially cheaper than nuclear. One of those potentially cheaper is wind.

with a virtually nonexistent environmental footprint

Try to tell that to indigenous people's from who's land uranium is mined. Ask the Sioux or Navajo in the US. Ask the Algonquin First Nation in Canada. Or the aboriginals in Australia such as the Adnyamathanha community.

Now I picked on Australia, Canada, and the Unites States because they should have among the strictest environmental laws. Imagine what happens in countries without strong environmental laws.

AND with equal reliability (which, of all of the renewables I've ever heard of, none can accomplish all three).

Check into conservation which is listed as being cheaper and geothermal which is also listed as being cheaper by at least one of the links above and is good for baseload power.

Subsidies will be taken by the Nuclear Industry as long as they are offered

Nuclear power asks and is addicted to subsides. Without them Wall Street will not pay for nuclear power plants to be built. At least solar and wind would be built without subsidies. Think NanoSolar asked for or was given subsidies? Not that I know of, instead billionaire founders of Google invested in NanoSolar. Even if they did though, economically subsidies are supposed to be only temporary aid, however coal and nuclear power get subsidized year after year after year. There is nothing temporary about the subsidies they get.

One, the new "Cap and Trade" laws will make Coal Power (which is already more expensive to operate than Nuclear, even though the initial plant construction costs *might* be cheaper)

As referenced above coal is cheapest and even with cap and trade or carbon capture and storage it's still cheaper than nuclear power. Now if you have a link to data that disputes that provide it.

Despite all the rosy pictures and cheery outlook for renewables, *only* Nuclear Energy is a drop in replacement for Coal Fired Energy.

No matter how many tymes you repeat a lie* it doesn't magically make i

I'm told that these two nice chaps (twitter and ibane) readily agreeing with themselves inside of ten minutes (world record!) are actually the same person; apparently Mr. twitter here likes to have conversations with himself to drum up support of his posts.

And the 'Too funny' anon comment below, given the timing of the post (only two minutes after twitter) and the style is also probably him, since ACs (like me!) are actually more visible than his posts because all of his accounts have terrible karma.

I'd give this 'discussion' a wide berth :)

Apropos

- JM (posting anon also... sorry)

Make sure you be careful: they have cameramen staked out at public transit locations to try to photograph people with their masks off; they'll try to match you by your clothing, identify you, and harass you to no end. Some guys in London found out the hard way. Their practice is always to stay under the threshold of proof. If they can throw a brick through your window and if you can't prove they did it, they'll do that.

They're planning on disrupting the protests with staged violence by anons. Make sure you catch it all on camera if you attend.

I'll be brief.

If you beleave that God will look after mankind and all will be OK then we don't need man space travel.

If you don't think God is going to that helpful, then mankind faces a bit of a problem.

Currently our economic system is based on growth and that growth is gained by consumerism, which is a little bit of a problem when we have a fixed resource.

So mankind has only two choices.

1. Move over to a sustainable system with zero growth (and invent a new system of money supply, and not charge interest, no making money from money).

2. Get into Space ASAP and start mining our solar system.

Why ASAP, we are reaching peak everything very quickly, why?? simple math more that the fact we are actually running out of everything important. To quote Albert Bartlett. "The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function."

Ok its really 'peak everything thats important', research the ingredient list of minerals required to manufacture consumer electronics, solar panels etc. Some of the raw materials are already very difficult to find and very rare.

Recycling delays the problem, but you've still got entropy to deal with.

See :-
Shoveling Fuel for a runaway train - Brian Czech
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency
http://sydney.indymedia.org.au/story/peak-minerals-landmark-report-warns-mineral-resource-depletion

That's exactly what I mean. The corporate media has every reason to maintain the status quo, so they marginalise dissent by ignoring dissenters. There will certainly be reporting, but it will be about that "legalise meth!" guy and it will ignore the issues that the protesters came to protest. The Sydney Indymedia coverage is great, by the way.

You can get some grass roots coverage of the protests against APEC at Sydney Indymedia.